Generally, the need to monitor, control, record and provide detailed records of the usage of a telephone system in a controlled institutional environment is well recognized. It is common to utilize a controlled telephone system capable of monitoring outgoing telephone connections in many types of institutional environments, including penal institutions, military institutions, hospitals, schools, businesses, specific types of government institutions, etc.
The reasons for monitoring and controlling institutional telephone systems are evident. To prevent such institutions from incurring unaccountable telephone costs, the institutions must either restrict access to outbound telephone lines or employ a telephone monitoring system to charge the responsible party for making the outbound communication. Otherwise, unaccountable telephone costs would severely hinder the availability of the telephone systems in institutions. However, the restrictions utilized by these systems result in overall inefficiency as two-thirds of the attempted calls go unanswered presenting a problem for both the system's users and the institution.
It is imperative for many institutions to utilize a communication system that provides an accurate identification means for administrators to determine the individual responsible for each outbound telephone call. A communication system must also be able to monitor communications and maintain a useful record of the communications. Additionally, the system should include the ability to restrict access or provide options to particular users. Considering the number of users in a large institution, different payment methods available and the excessive call volume at many institutions, it is evident that an effective telephone management system is essential.
Providing telephone systems in specific types of highly restricted institutions, such as penal institutions, results in the consideration of numerous additional complicating factors. Generally, the government heavily regulates outbound communications in penal institutions. Therefore, communication systems implemented in penal institutions or similar facilities must meet greater security requirements often mandated by regulatory bodies affiliated with the county, state or federal institution. Thus, the communication system used in a regulated institution must employ unique functions often unnecessary in other types of institutions.
In its most general form, a penal institution's telephone system utilizes a call processor to approve and place a call, surveillance equipment or monitoring equipment, and a recording device for evidencing the conversation. Generally, these simple systems are not equipped to restrict an inmate from calling an individual. However, it is preferable for the call system devices now employed in such institutions to have the capability to thwart an inmate from calling certain specific individuals or types of individuals. Systems currently exist capable of controlling calls. It is well documented that without the necessary constraints on an inmate's use of the telephone system, inmates have often harassed outside parties or individuals. For example, it is generally preferred that an inmate be prevented from placing a telephone call to the prosecutor who prosecuted the inmate's case or another attorney responsible for the sentencing of the inmate. In another example, it may be preferred that an inmate be prevented from contacting the victim of the inmate's crime or witnesses from the inmate's case. Additionally, inmates have used previous penal institution call systems to perpetrate additional criminal activities such as fraudulent schemes or specific criminal conspiracies. Specifically, inmates have been known to arrange credit card fraud attempts, the smuggling of contraband into the facility, and have even been known to arrange escape attempts over the penal institution's telephone system. Therefore, it is critical that an efficient penal institution carefully monitor all outgoing telephone calls making a regulated penal institution telephone system a necessity.
Another concern in implementing an efficient institution telephone system is cost control. In order for a system to be cost effective, the system must critically monitor and record the activities of each individual user in order to properly charge each individual caller for his or her outgoing calls. Typically, telephone communication systems in penal institutions provide an inmate with a telephone account upon arrival. There are several options for an inmate to select with respect to payment on the account. For example, an inmate may place prior personal earnings into the account. The cost of each call is then deducted from the total amount in the inmate's account until no balance remains. The inmate may also choose to utilize collect call means. In addition, an inmate may be assigned a commissary account, where funds are added to the account based on work performed by the inmate. As the funds increase, the inmate may apply these funds to the cost of placing telephone calls. The inmate debit account may be located onsite, at a central office facility, or at a third-party site.
The inmate's family may alternatively control the inmate debit account. For example, the inmate's family may control the inmate's access to the debit account either remotely (e.g., by using the Internet, accessing a toll-free/pay to dial telephone number, using a mail form, etc.) or by visiting the prison facility. The inmate's family may add funds to the debit account and thereby control the call volume allowed to the inmate.
Another requirement of a secure telephone management system in a penal institution is the accurate identification of the telephone call participants. Generally, it is common in a penal institution to assign each inmate a personal identification number (“PIN”). When an inmate attempts to place a telephone call, the inmate must supply a valid PIN to gain access to the telephone system. Other systems include requiring personal information in addition to a PIN to be supplied by the inmate/user. For example, a user might be prompted to supply a PIN as well as certain information that may only be known to the user. A common example is a request by the call system to provide their mother's maiden name.
Another required feature of a telephone management system for a penal institution or similar facility is a means for restricting calls placed by a user (e.g., an inmate). It is well documented that inmates often try to harass individuals related to their arrest or confinement, such as judges, prosecutors, witnesses, etc., through telephonic communications. Penal institutions have attempted to prevent this harassment by restricting the telephone numbers each inmate is able to access. For example, a system may utilize a PIN or other identification means to access a list of telephone numbers that the inmate may not call, or alternatively, the system may access a list of numbers that the inmate is authorized to connect to (i.e., the inmate can only call the numbers appearing on the list). Telephone numbers placed on the restricted list can include any individual related to the conviction (e.g., the arresting police officer, the prosecuting attorney, etc.), while telephone numbers placed on the permitted list may include, for example, close family relatives. The system may also limit the amount of time each inmate/user is permitted to conduct each outbound telephone call through the system. Furthermore, restrictions may be regularly updated. For example, if an inmate misbehaves, the inmate's telephone privileges may be further limited or revoked completely.
Penal institutions are also concerned with monitoring the activities and communications of inmates. Monitoring telephone activities is necessary to restrict connections to illegal activities outside of the institution. Three existing types of call monitoring techniques are known in the art. The first technique is live monitoring. Live monitoring requires an operator or other individual to listen to each telephone call and alert the proper authorities if necessary.
The second type of monitoring involves recording the telephone conversation via a common recording device. A common example is a recording device such as a magnetic tape drive or a computer hard drive. This type of monitoring may be continuous or intermittent depending on the degree of security required for each inmate.
The third type of monitoring is known as passive monitoring. Passive monitoring may be activated when certain keywords are spoken. In addition, passive monitoring may be activated if the telephone call at the termination end is transferred to a third party via certain known detection means such as silence detection, hook-flash detection, etc.
Penal institutions currently record most inmate telephone calls, with the exception of lawyer-inmate communications, which are generally prohibited by law. Typically, in the art, monitoring may occur using any combination of the three methods (e.g., live monitoring, electronic recording monitoring or passive monitoring). It can be advantageous to flag certain individuals in an inmate's profile as highly suspicious. If the inmate initiates communication with the flagged individual, the system will alert a live operator to monitor the system. In such a system it is essential that the system correctly identify the called individual to avoid unnecessary expenditure of live operators.
Alternatively, the inmate telephone call system may utilize a remote-alert notification system wherein the system contacts an operator when a violation has occurred. The system may contact the operator utilizing telephone means, paging means, computer means, etc. This notification system may be set to call the operator a limited number of times or until the alert has been noted in the inmate telephone call system. The operator may then access information about the alert remotely using the telephone, Internet, or any other such remote access means.
In order to alleviate some of the problems and concerns discussed herein, many penal institutions have implemented certain task-specific advanced systems. Generally, these “advanced” systems known in the art comprise several features. For example, it is known in current systems to employ permanent call blocking. Specifically, it is known in the art to block an inmate or group of inmates from dialing certain telephone numbers. Most systems also prevent inmates from talking directly to live operators. This prevents inmates from requesting that the operator forward a call or provide additional telephone numbers allowing inmates to harass or locate additional parties. Furthermore, current systems block “1-800,” “1-900” and other like telephone numbers including toll-free and pay to-dial telephone numbers. In addition, certain institutions may elect to block country codes, specific area codes, or other third-party numbers.
Current systems known in the art may also utilize a feature commonly referred to as “selective” call blocking. As discussed, “selective” call blocking may be employed to thwart inmates from establishing a connection with a selected group of individuals (i.e., with the home telephone of prison guards, wardens, indictment witnesses, trial witnesses, police officers, judges, etc.). It is also foreseeable that the telephone numbers of the family members of these specific individuals may also be blocked.
Some current systems also limit the use of specific long distance carriers. This feature proves useful in limiting unnecessary costs incurred by employing alternate carriers.
Other current systems utilize features commonly referred to as “hook flash” prevention or “click” and “pop” prevention modes. These systems prevent inmates from extending the current outgoing telephone call and entering a new telephone call with a new number without fully terminating the original telephone call. For example, this feature prevents an inmate from utilizing common call forwarding features and the like.
In addition, some current institutional telephone systems electronically or manually disable the keypad after a telephone number is dialed and the telephone call is connected. This feature prevents inmates from interacting with telephone games and lotteries, and in certain older systems, prevents the inmate from achieving an unrestricted dial tone.
Another common feature employed by institutional systems is three-way call prevention. This feature prevents an inmate from instructing the called party to bridge the telephone call to another telephone number.
Other known systems in the art may exhibit other regulatory features. For example, telephone communication systems generally allow an institution to limit the duration of a telephone call or to limit the cost of the telephone call. These types of features further allow a facility to customize the telephone call systems thereby preventing unrecoverable expenditures.
Another control used by current institution telephone systems is the use of certain aspects of biometric recognition for the identification of users or inmates (i.e., the calling party). It may be beneficial for communication systems in penal institutions to incorporate biometrics as an additional security device. Biometric recognition is commonly available in a number of fields. For example, biometrics recognition has found a number of security uses, including common usage, in credit card systems and building security systems. Biometric information includes fingerprints, hand geometry, voiceprints, retinal patterns, iris scans, signatures, infrared facial patterns, and all other sources which constitute unique physiological characteristics and which can assist in establishing a person's identity. Various devices exist which can scan one or more biometric characteristics and digitize the information.
Generally, while much effort has been made to establish controlled inmate telephonic communication, inmate call management systems are inefficient. Studies have shown that approximately two-thirds of all calls attempted by an inmate to an outside party are not answered by a live party (i.e., no answer or an answer by an automated message machine). These unanswered calls present a problem for inmates as they often count against their monthly limit thereby reducing the time available for inmates to talk to such people as family members. Currently, the Federal Bureau of Prisons has a three hundred (300) minute per month limit for many inmates. It may take the inmate several attempts to successfully contact an outside party or the inmate may never successfully contact a desired outside party.
In addition, inmates and their outside contacts often complain of the difficulty to communicate via live telephone conversations as they are often several time zones away from each other. Due to the lack of successful completions of calls (i.e., only one-third of attempted calls are successful), inmates try to find a way to get around the system resulting in even more restrictions placed on usage of the system. Additionally, these unanswered calls present a loss of revenue for the institution, as it is difficult to charge for system usage if the call is not answered.
A system is thus desirable that increases the care and efficiency of communication between inmates and third parties. The system notifies the third parties when an inmate has tried to contact them. The system also allows the third party who receives the notification to reply with a message to the inmate. The system further enables authorized third parties to access the system and request to contact an inmate at any time, regardless of whether the inmate has tried to contact the third party. Advantageously, this will increase efficiency as well as generate an additional revenue stream for the institution. However, due to factors such as government regulations, such a system must be monitored and controlled in similar manners to current call management systems. The system also allows for live talk between the inmate and outside party if the third party answers the call, record the conversation as necessary, bill for usage of the system, etc.
One system known in the art discloses an automatic account number validation and billing management system. The system prompts a user for an account number and compares the number inputted to a number stored in a database to determine validity. If the account number is valid and found in the database, the system completes the predetermined telephonic connection. If the number is not in the database, and therefore invalid, the system will utilize voice prompts to request re-entry of the number or provide further instructions. The system attempts to locally automate and simplify the process of payment for routing calls without live operator assistance, but does not address additional security concerns that may exist in specific facilities, such as in a penal institution. Furthermore, it does not provide for protection measures to confirm that the individual supplying the account number is the individual entitled to the use of the account. In such a hostile environment as a penal institution, an account number may easily be obtainable through coercion or by force. The system does not provide any means of monitoring the conversations taking place or restricting which individuals are accessed by the user. Additionally, the system does not provide means for contact request from a third party for a specific inmate or notification to an outside party if the inmate's call is unanswered.
Another system known in the art discloses a call management system enabling prepayment of telephone calls utilizing a debit system. Specifically, a user of the system obtains a special code by depositing a prepayment. The prepayment is stored in a database for use in verifying calling party calls. To access the system, a user dials a special number and inputs a user-specific code for verification followed by the number of the party to be called. Next, the code is verified by the system. If verification is successful and sufficient funds are available, the call is connected. The prepayment amount, minus deductions for the running cost of the call, is tabulated as the call progresses. The call terminates either when the prepaid funds are exhausted in the user's account or when either party disconnects. The invention also includes steps to prevent the same access code from being used at different terminals. However, the system does not teach a means for selecting the call type or a call monitoring means. It also fails to teach an advanced verification means specific to a user. Further, it does not provide a means of notification to the outside party if the inmate's call is not answered.
Yet another system known in the art teaches a multilingual prepaid telephone system capable of interfacing with a public switched telephone network. In the system, each user is assigned a PIN and a credit account. A user first dials a number to access the telephone system and chooses a language for all subsequent voice prompts. The user then supplies a PIN, which is compared against a list of numbers in a database. If sufficient credit is available for the duration of a telephone call to the destination number, the connection is completed and a timer is set for the available duration of the call. The call terminates either when the allowed amount of time for the call expires or if one party member hangs up the telephone line. If the latter situation occurs, the system computes a new available credit balance for the user's account. However, the system fails to provide a selection means for the user, such as the ability to choose the type of call to be placed (e.g., collect, debit, international, etc.). It also fails to teach any call monitoring means and would therefore be unacceptable as a communication system for a penal institution. Additionally, it does not teach any contact request/notification means.
Still another system discusses an integrated commissary system for receiving and processing orders in an institutional setting. The commissary system is designed for use without access to a PSTN. According to the system, user status and inventory status are stored in an onsite database. To access the database, a user provides identifier information and item selections through selected telephones. The selections are compared against the onsite database using a processor. If the user is authenticated and the requested items are available, the processor generates transaction records, updates user commissary information, and correctly adjusts inventory. The updated information is stored in a file that may be used for record keeping or archival purposes. However, the system does not teach a commissary system for use with a PSTN or any contact request/notification means. This system also fails to teach multiple authentication means and would therefore be unacceptable for use in a penal institution.
Still a different system known in the art discloses a software process for real-time call rating and debiting so that a subscriber's account balance is not exceeded. The method disclosed estimates the time when the user's balance will expire by using the total charge per second average. The process then determines the time remaining by dividing the account balance by the average charge per second of all telephone calls, and the time limit for the call is then set accordingly. This method is useful if the rate for long distance calls is not known locally. However, the system does not allow for other types of calls, such as collect calls, to take place. Further, it fails to provide an advanced call monitoring apparatus with an advanced authentication apparatus. Also, it fails to teach a multi-mode communication notification means with a specific contact.
There is also a system that depicts an automated public telephone control for charge or collect call billing. The apparatus embodies a microprocessor system controlling voice prompting, recognition of responses, network signaling, recording of calling details, and verification of account numbers. The disclosed invention provides for an automated telephone billing for public telephone systems. The system offers a plurality of billing methods, such as billing to a credit account number, to the called party (collect calling), or to a third party. An additional aspect of the invention describes the recognition of voice utterances from other signals and called party spoken words (i.e., the system can recognize the word “yes” when spoken by any individual). However, it does not identify or verify the individual speaking. Furthermore, this system does not provide a means to identify the user or verify that the user is not partaking in fraudulent activities. It also fails to teach of a monitoring, call control, and contact request/notification means.
Yet still another system depicts a collect call, system that can automatically route long distance calls without intervention of an outside service or operator. This feature enables private public telephone owners, as opposed to primary telephone companies, to receive revenue for completion of the call. The invention comprises the steps of providing the calling party with voice prompts, receiving voice or dialed signal information about the calling party in response to the voice prompts, locally, recording the information about the calling party, providing the called party information about the calling party, and reacting to a variety of provided signals by either the called or calling party. The system only provides a method and apparatus for placing collect calls. In addition, it avoids consideration of providing other possible payment methods. The system disclosed is further limited by its lack of telephone call monitoring ability and calling party identification means, and is therefore unsuitable for use in penal institutions.
Still a different system exemplifies the need for a control management and monitoring system in institutional settings. This system discloses a system for controlling, monitoring, recording and reporting telephone communications. The system deals primarily with the identification of a user through use of a PIN and restricting telephone communications through a profile accessed by the PIN. The system further contemplates means for monitoring and recording communications. However, the system only enables live talk between parties and provides no means for contact requests by an outside party for a specific inmate and notification if a call is unanswered.
Even another system is primarily concerned with incorporating an improved method of monitoring calls. The method includes a means for detecting tones commonly associated with call bridging and call forwarding attempts. For example, the system is directed to the detection of tones such as ring signals, busy signals, special information tones, dual tone multi-frequency tones, call progress tones or other similar tones characteristic of the placement of a telephone call. It is limited by detection of certain sounds, which may not be readily machine-recognizable. For example, it is foreseeable that interference, background noise, or compressed voice data may inhibit the detection of the tones. Also, the system does not teach any method for multi-mode communication notification means.
Another system known in the art describes a system for the verification of a calling party, called party and a secure connection. The invention includes the costly requirement of secure telephone devices known in the art. Specifically, the invention teaches a system wherein the calling and called parties supply voice data, which is encoded and transmitted over a telephone network. Both users hear the alternate party's recorded voice data and verify that the supplied voice data is correct. The call is established only if both parties verify that the called party has provided the correct voice data. However, it would be too costly to implement such a system in a penal institution or similar facility. Additionally, the system does not consider possible payment methods for calls or call management. For example, certain inmates may be entitled to call only a few particular individuals. A system within penal institutions, or similar facilities, must include a means for limiting the number of potential called parties and the specific parties to which inmates can call and provide a means for monitoring inmate call transactions.
Further, a different system discloses a system to permit users repetitive access to a multitude of systems. The system requires an initial enrollment phase for access. The enrollment phase consists of extracting biometric data to be stored for future use. The format of the data is compatible with a plurality of verification/identification systems. For example, in one embodiment, it describes a biometric recognition means including voice recognition, fingerprint identification, and retinal scan identification. However, it does not address restrictions to the system or further monitoring means during use of the system, which are essential for systems within a penal institution.
Finally, a system known in the art provides a methodology for a computerized telecommunications system for voice to text message storage for use in correctional facilities. This system receives an external message via either voice or text. There are two storage means: a voice message box or an email inbox. If a voice message is received, it passes as a regular telephonic voice message and is then stored as a voice message in the voice message box. If instead, the storage unit is an email box and a voice message is received, the voice message is converted to text and the message is then saved. The reverse happens if the message is a text message and the storage medium is a voice message box. If a text message is received and the inmate has an email inbox, the text message is saved as text. The inmate is then notified of the new message. This system can also allow the inmate to send either a text or a voice message to an external party. If the inmate leaves a voice message, no conversion occurs and the message is sent. However, if an inmate's message is in text form, either a text to voice conversion occurs before being sent to the outside party or the text message is sent to the external party. This system requires an external party have access to the system to receive a contact request sent by an inmate. The external party must constantly check the system to determine whether they have new requests. Only upon accessing the system is the external party notified if there are any new requests. Further, the system requires that the inmate choose to either leave a contact request or attempt a live call. These drawbacks severely limit the system's functionality making it both inefficient and difficult to implement into institutional settings.
In view of the foregoing, there clearly exists a need for a method and apparatus for increasing the efficiency of an institution's telephone call system. Furthermore, there clearly exists a need for a telecommunication system for use in penal or similar institutions that incorporates the ability to handle calls not answered by a human, whether the calls are unanswered or answered by a communication notification system. Also, the system should allow outside parties for web initiated contact requests with a specific inmate and/or be notified through an existing inmate telephone system if they have missed a call from a specific inmate. In addition, there exists a need for a system and method to electronically notify the outside party when the inmate has been notified of the outstanding call request.